Talk:Australopithecus bahrelghazali

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Australopithecus bahrelghazali/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 13:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I have done a little copy editing. Come back to me here if you are unhappy with any of it.

• Several "References" and all of the "Further reading" lack identifiers, eg doi's, ISBNs or ISSNs.

I forgot to delete Further reading   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Do you have ISSNs or similar for references 2, 3 and 6?

• "Could the year of discovery be in the lead - preferably in the opening sentence?

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "in favour of synonymising it with the contemporaneous A. afarensis". At least for the lead, would it be possible to have this in more accessible language? "synonymising" specifically.

such as?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Off the top of my head 'in favour of grouping it together with (synonymising)'.

"The validity of A. bahrelghazali has not been widely accepted, in favour of classifying the specimens as A. afarensis, a better known Pliocene australopithecine from East Africa"   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  16:43, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Yes. Good.

• "from 3 partial jawbones". "3" → 'three' per MoS.

I like using numbers over spelling because my brain can more easily identify them   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Personally, so do I. But the MoS doesn't and a GAN is only about the nominator's personal preferences in so far as they don't conflict with policy or guidelines.

They're called guidelines as opposed to rules because they're not the word of God. It's times like these that we have to WP:IGNOREALLRULES   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  16:43, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• It's not a dealbreaker at GAN, but you are quite likely to get an irritating drive by edit which you won't be able to revert. Still, that's not what we're here for.

• "and likewise predominantly ate C₄ savanna foods" Likewise? Likewise to what?

it inhabited a grassland, so it does make sense that it mostly ate foods that commonly grow on savanna   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• It does indeed. But "likewise" means that something is like something; not that one thing follows from another.

What???   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  16:43, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Hmm. Looks hard at "the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience" and decides to let it go. I think that most readers will be able to puzzle it out.

• "process so much in the way of C₄ plants". So much as what?

changed to "the teeth seem ill-equipped to process C₄ plants"   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "In 1995, a jawbone preserving the premolars, canines, and the right second incisor (KT12/H1, "Abel") as well as an isolated first upper premolar (KT12/H2)". Could the parentheses be removed and the contents be unpacked a little, for the non-specialist reader? I know that you do this later, but it would seem to me to make things more user friendly to do it at first mention.

better?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Much. Cheers.

• "Breton anthropologist". Nationality please, not region.

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "In 2008, a pelite recovered from". As well as the link, could we have an in line, bracketed explanation of "pelite".

done

• "and Brunet agreed with an age of roughly 3.5 million years ago.". Optional: did Beauvilain agree?

By saying it's impossible to radiometrically date it, Beauvilain disagreed   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "disproved the earlier notion". Is there a more encyclopedic word than "notion"?

such as?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hypothesis; theory; idea; argument; premise; view; even assumption.

• "At present". Optional: → 'As of 2020'.

if it ever gets fixed, that would be very significant and article would be updated accordingly   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "with each other over other hominin genera." I find the last four words confusing to the point that I don't know what you are trying to say. (This may just be me.)

"rather than how close they are to each other in the hominin family tree"   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "Unlike A. afarensis, the alveolar part of the jawbone where the tooth sockets are is almost vertical as opposed to oblique, poorly developed superior transverse torus and moderate inferior torus (two ridges on the midline of the jaw on the tongue side), and thin enamel on the chewing surface of the premolars." is there a word - eg 'possesses' - missing immediately before "poorly" here?

yes   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "the presence of 3 distinct tooth roots". "3" → 'three' per MoS.

per above   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Ditto.

• "KT40 especially as well as KT12/H1 have the same dimensions". Possibly → 'KT40 especially, as well as KT12/H1, have the same dimensions'?

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "The smaller C3 portion may have comprised" → 'There is a smaller C3 portion, which may have comprised' or similar.

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "despite 55–80% of δ¹³C deriving from C₄ sources". In English please.

A carbon isotope analysis analyzes where carbon came from (specifically, from what primary producer), and 55–80% of δ¹³C derived from C₄ plant sources   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "USOs" Abbreviations should be given in full at first mention.

it already is   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Gah! *smacks head*

• "Reduncinae, Alcelaphinae, and Antilopinae, whereas Tragelaphini". Could this be rendered more accessible? Perhaps by translating to English and giving the specialist terms, Wikilinked, in brackets after each mention?

they don't have common names, that's why I specified they're bovids   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "drier than contemporary East African sites." Contemporary with Australopithecus bahrelghazali or contemporary with us?

changed to "Pliocene"   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "the area featured aquatic creatures including predominantly catfish". Delete "including"; insert a comma after "creatures".

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Link "gharial".

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• "Koro Toro, during Mega-Chad events (which has been cyclical for the last 7 million years)". "has" → 'have'. (The reference here is to the events, not to the lake.) Or rephrase to avoid this.

done   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Nice article. I enjoyed that. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• Looking good. A few comments on your comments above. If I haven't commented I am happy with your response. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:32, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

• A fine job of reducing a sprawling mess of date and theory to a tight and comprehensible article. Promoting. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:09, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed